Skip to main content

Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Douglas, PS; Hirshfeld, JW; Edie, RN; Stephenson, LW; Gleason, K; Edmunds, LH
Published in: J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)
1988

One hundred and six consecutive patients who had mitral valve replacement with either a St. Jude or porcine heterograft prosthesis were prospectively studied. The 2 groups are similar with respect to 67 clinical and operative factors and allow comparison of valve performance as an independent variable. Total follow-up is 3,312 patient-months (mean 36 months, range 2-57 months, 94% complete). There are no statistical differences in symptomatic improvement or mortality by life table analysis. Valve-related complications expressed as percent per patient-year are: reoperation: 1.8 St. Jude and 3.8 porcine; endocarditis: 1.2 and 1.9; regurgitant murmur: 2.3 and 1.9; hemolysis: 1.8 and 0.0; late thromboembolism: 1.8 and 1.0; hemorrhage: 2.9 and 2.9; and valve failure: 0.0 and 1.0. There were no significant differences found. Actuarial survival at 3 years was 78% in St. Jude and 81% in porcine patients. Forty-six percent of patients with St. Jude valves and 55% of patients with porcine valves were alive and free of all complications at latest follow-up. The clinical performance of St. Jude and porcine mitral valves are similar over this period of intermediate follow-up.

Duke Scholars

Published In

J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)

ISSN

0021-9509

Publication Date

1988

Volume

29

Issue

2

Start / End Page

128 / 133

Location

Italy

Related Subject Headings

  • Reoperation
  • Prosthesis Design
  • Prospective Studies
  • Mitral Valve
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Female
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Douglas, P. S., Hirshfeld, J. W., Edie, R. N., Stephenson, L. W., Gleason, K., & Edmunds, L. H. (1988). Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), 29(2), 128–133.
Douglas, P. S., J. W. Hirshfeld, R. N. Edie, L. W. Stephenson, K. Gleason, and L. H. Edmunds. “Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses.J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 29, no. 2 (1988): 128–33.
Douglas PS, Hirshfeld JW, Edie RN, Stephenson LW, Gleason K, Edmunds LH. Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 1988;29(2):128–33.
Douglas, P. S., et al. “Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses.J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), vol. 29, no. 2, 1988, pp. 128–33.
Douglas PS, Hirshfeld JW, Edie RN, Stephenson LW, Gleason K, Edmunds LH. Clinical comparison of St. Jude and porcine mitral valve prostheses. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 1988;29(2):128–133.

Published In

J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)

ISSN

0021-9509

Publication Date

1988

Volume

29

Issue

2

Start / End Page

128 / 133

Location

Italy

Related Subject Headings

  • Reoperation
  • Prosthesis Design
  • Prospective Studies
  • Mitral Valve
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Female